Cunningham v Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia Queensland v Wicks

The case of Cunningham v Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia Queensland v Wicks involved a dispute over a minor debt, specifically a consultancy agreement allegedly made after the resignation of Cunningham as the CEO of IPWEAQ. The dispute was heard by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). The central legal issue was whether Cunningham had proven the existence of a separate consultancy agreement following her resignation, which she claimed was orally agreed upon in the presence of several witnesses and confirmed through emails.

The court examined the evidence provided by Cunningham, including the absence of any corroborative testimony from the alleged witnesses, particularly the 'external consultant'. The emails exchanged between Cunningham and IPWEAQ were also considered equivocal, with no clear acceptance of Cunningham’s offer to provide support. The tribunal found that Cunningham’s evidence was insufficient to establish the certainty of contractual terms required for a binding agreement. The court upheld the tribunal's decision, finding no error in its reasoning.

The court concluded that there was no appellable error in preferring one version of the facts over another, and the tribunal's decision was reasonable given the evidence presented. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed, affirming the tribunal's decision that Cunningham had not sufficiently proven the existence of the alleged consultancy agreement. The tribunal's findings were deemed to have rational support in the evidence, and thus, the appeal was unsuccessful.